Samsung tries to gain access to unannounced next-gen Apple devices

Samsung's latest maneuver in what appears will be a long, drawn-out legal battle with Apple over mobile device copying is a bold one. The company filed a "reciprocal expedited discovery request" asking to see samples of Apple's expected, though unannounced, next-generation iPhone and iPad hardware.

The motion was filed shortly after Apple was granted an expedited discovery request which sought to gain access to upcoming Samsung hardware that is believed to infringe on Apple's design patents and trade dress. Apple had already claimed Samsung's Galaxy S smartphones and Galaxy Tab crossed the line between inspiration and rip-off, and Apple sought access to announced new products to determine if Apple should add them to its lawsuit against Samsung or potentially file an injunction barring their release.

The judge agreed with Apple's request to examine the Droid Charge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy S II, Galaxy Tab 10.1, and Galaxy Tab 8.9 because images Apple had submitted to the court in its original complaint showed "reasonable basis" for Apple's belief that Samsung's latest products might be "designed to mimic Apple's products."

(We have to note that we have seen a Galaxy Tab 10.1 "special edition," and there is a resemblance to the iPad 2.)

"In particular," wrote Judge Lucy Koh in her decision, "the design and appearance of Samsung's forthcoming products and packaging are directly relevant to Apple's trademark, trade dress, and design claims. Because these claims are subject to consumer confusion and 'ordinary observer' standards, the products themselves and the packaging in which they are sold are likely to be central to any motion for preliminary injunction."

The motion does not allow Apple to thoroughly examine the products, however—only its counsel may do so.

Samsung's lawyers last Friday filed their own motion to gain similar expedited access to Apple's next iPhone and iPad hardware designs. Samsung claims that the evidence goes directly to defending itself from an expected preliminary injunction that could bar Samsung from releasing some of the mentioned products (or result in the Droid Charge or Infuse 4G being pulled off the shelf since they have already been released).

An important difference between Apple's motion and Samsung's however, is that the five products that Apple sought discovery for had already been announced and in most cases shown or released to the press. Judge Koh cited that particular fact in her decision. Samsung, on the other hand, is attempting to gain access to hardware that it merely believes Apple has in the works—Apple has made no public revelation about its next-generation hardware, even though it is likely that the company has prototypes floating around somewhere in its headquarters.

Former IP attorney Nilay Patel reasoned that Samsung may have merely filed this motion in hopes that it can gain additional leverage against Apple. Patel argued that it doesn't seem likely that Samsung's motion would be approved, at least not based on the reasoning that Koh used to approve Apple's request. At the same time, Apple could merely file an injunction against Samsung's products citing similarities with current iPhone and iPad hardware, making Samsung's request to examine future devices moot.

Neither company has yet filed formal responses to the initial complaints in either Apple's original lawsuit or Samsung's ensuing countersuit.

181 Reader Comments

Samsung was ordered to shows stuff to Apple, goes into etc.Samsung wants to see some Apple devices it's front page news.

In any case, I hope all the suppliers take a hard look at Apple and decide if they're worth it. They haev shown their true colors time and time again like when Jobs publicly misquoted Samsung in his keynote.

Looking at some of the phones that Apple claims are infringing on the iphone I don't see why. Take the Droid Charge. Completely different shape than the iPhone. Run's android. How is that infringing? Oh wait the UI, omg let's try to patent a grid of square icons man that's so original and innovative... I think Apple is just afraid of competition and of getting left behind like when Windows PCs almost squashed them out of existence. Apple you fail...

Looking at some of the phones that Apple claims are infringing on the iphone I don't see why. Take the Droid Charge. Completely different shape than the iPhone. Run's android. How is that infringing? Oh wait the UI, omg let's try to patent a grid of square icons man that's so original and innovative... I think Apple is just afraid of competition and of getting left behind like when Windows PCs almost squashed them out of existence. Apple you fail...

Have you looked at the Droid Change's screen and icons? In case you haven't, here is a link to a picture.

Well, in and of the basis that they are both rows upon rows of squarish icons - just as the Palm was, just as the Blackberry was and is, yes. It's why I went with something different - I didn't want the same row upon row of little icons.

Honestly, if you're talking about GUI, which you are, then I'd argue LOTS of prior art going back a LONG way.

Well, in and of the basis that they are both rows upon rows of squarish icons - just as the Palm was, just as the Blackberry was and is, yes. It's why I went with something different - I didn't want the same row upon row of little icons.

Honestly, if you're talking about GUI, which you are, then I'd argue LOTS of prior art going back a LONG way.

Seems to me that if Samsung wants to put the squeeze on Apple, they should stop supplying them with hardware, or maybe jack the prices. Apple would drop the frivolous lawsuits and come crawling back in no time. The iPhone 4 basically is a Samsung phone with an Apple logo on it.

Samsung was ordered to shows stuff to Apple, goes into etc.Samsung wants to see some Apple devices it's front page news.

Sometimes we link to other sites' coverage in an ETC when we don't feel like we can offer anything new to the story, or just don't have time to cover it but we feel like readers would be interested in reading about it and discussing. Because we hadn't covered it in-depth before, though, I had the opportunity to detail the motion that Apple was granted in more detail.

In other words, one Apple post for two separate but related stories—a result I would think that people that gripe about "too much Apple" coverage here on Ars would appreciate.

Seems to me that if Samsung wants to put the squeeze on Apple, they should stop supplying them with hardware, or maybe jack the prices. Apple would drop the frivolous lawsuits and come crawling back in no time. The iPhone 4 basically is a Samsung phone with an Apple logo on it.

If only they didn't have contracts in place. I'm pretty sure Apple has Samsung by the balls when it comes to default penalties.

Entertaining, yes. Although I'm not sure the judge will find it as entertaining. In general, they tend to frown on tit-for-tat motions that seem to be purely done out of spite. It's just more time that they have to spend dealing with stuff.

Also, yeah, for those people claiming that they don't see how a particular part of Samsung's UI or design copies Apple, it's more the fact that it's a bunch of particular parts that add up to copying. So it's not the grid design. It's the grid design, with the same number of square icons with rounded corners, with some very similar icons, with a bar at the bottom where some icons can be attached that is getting Samsung in trouble. And if you don't see the similarlities by then, perhaps an eye exam is in order.

Seems to me that if Samsung wants to put the squeeze on Apple, they should stop supplying them with hardware, or maybe jack the prices. Apple would drop the frivolous lawsuits and come crawling back in no time. The iPhone 4 basically is a Samsung phone with an Apple logo on it.

Apple likely has a contract with Samsung to supply parts for the iPhone. AFAIK, that only includes the application processor and maybe some NAND flash. That hardly makes the iPhone 4 "basically a Samsung phone with an Apple logo on it."

Furthermore, Apple's contracts also represent significant revenue for Samsung—they are probably hesitant to simply toss that revenue aside for the time being. This lawsuit is going to take some time; Samsung will only be in serious trouble if Apple requests and is granted a preliminary injunction against the named products, and even then Samsung will still be making money off of the iPhone in the form of the component(s) it supplies.

Well, in and of the basis that they are both rows upon rows of squarish icons - just as the Palm was, just as the Blackberry was and is, yes. It's why I went with something different - I didn't want the same row upon row of little icons.

Honestly, if you're talking about GUI, which you are, then I'd argue LOTS of prior art going back a LONG way.

Apple should get UI royalties from Android makers.

Then Microsoft should sue Apple for using the icons in a grid idea that Windows 3.1x had 20 years ago, and get royalties from Apple.

Samsung was ordered to shows stuff to Apple, goes into etc.Samsung wants to see some Apple devices it's front page news.

In any case, I hope all the suppliers take a hard look at Apple and decide if they're worth it. They haev shown their true colors time and time again like when Jobs publicly misquoted Samsung in his keynote.

There's an old saying that goes "imitation is the best form of flattery" - and it's very true, EXCEPT where the imitation is being marketed directly against the original with claims it's better, stronger, faster and can leap tall buildings in a single bound. Going to the much overused car analogy, do you reckon Mercedes or BMW might have an issue if Lexus released something that was practically identical in form to one of their most successful models, with only a few very minor cosmetic changes? Sure they've used styling hints as is common in any industry, but Toyota entered that market competing on merit and have done well. Shouldn't Samsung and other Android manufacturers being doing the same?

There've been accusations against Apple saying that they're only suing because they can't compete on merit with their iDevices, but ask yourself this question; If these Android devices are so much better than an iPhone as some claim, why do they have to resort to making them look like an iPhone / iPad? Isn't that just doing the very thing Apple are being accused of?

As for the court case, I think Samsung's request will be denied on the grounds that Apple haven't created anything that looks like a Samsung device - well none that I'm aware of anyway - where the opposite isn't the case.

Seems to me that if Samsung wants to put the squeeze on Apple, they should stop supplying them with hardware, or maybe jack the prices. Apple would drop the frivolous lawsuits and come crawling back in no time. The iPhone 4 basically is a Samsung phone with an Apple logo on it.

How so? Any other manufacturer would give their left nut to work with Apple. Intel is basically laying in a bed, legs open, with a come hither look on their face trying to get Apple to use their fabs (despite the commenst to teh contrary form intel, the fact that they are even considering speaks volumes, imo). Samsung is definitely one of the strongest games in town but they are not the only game in town and they know that despite this on going dispute it would be bad business to reneg on contracts most likely signed ages ago with Apple. Hell I would be surprised if Samsung didn't try to sweeten the deals they already have with Apple in-order to keep them from jumping ship. You really have to think about the kind of volume Apple demands and the fact that Apple usually pays ahead just to keep up with demand. That's an absolute dream to most manufacturers.

Right now nothing is selling like the iPad in the tablet space, that's a lot of cash for Samsung, they aren't going to jeopardize their profits because of a schoolyard squabble, especially when they know that their own products won't ship or sell at even remotely the same volume. Why risk it?

Looking at some of the phones that Apple claims are infringing on the iphone I don't see why. Take the Droid Charge. Completely different shape than the iPhone. Run's android. How is that infringing? Oh wait the UI, omg let's try to patent a grid of square icons man that's so original and innovative... I think Apple is just afraid of competition and of getting left behind like when Windows PCs almost squashed them out of existence. Apple you fail...

Neemobeer you fail at not looking a trolling tool. Is willful ignorance a requirement for trolls? Might want to educate your ignorant self about the difference between patents and trade dress.

Well, in and of the basis that they are both rows upon rows of squarish icons - just as the Palm was, just as the Blackberry was and is, yes. It's why I went with something different - I didn't want the same row upon row of little icons.

Honestly, if you're talking about GUI, which you are, then I'd argue LOTS of prior art going back a LONG way.

The Palm Pilot didn't even show it face until 1997. The Newton platform had come out ten years earlier. RIm was still making pagers at this time. RIM started releasing Blackberry's in 1999 (12 years later than Newton). So yeah, LOTS of prior art, going all the way back to Apple.

Android is so much more complicated, and usable than iOS, with Home Screens, Widgets with live data, Flash, a logical notifications system, true multi-tasking, fantastic Google tools, a real file structure, voice commands, voice to text and an open app system. It seems like, if anything, Samsung is right to ask to see if Apple is copying it, as is Google. The media now say's that Apple is preparing to copy Android in all of features that make Android unique and amazing.

Why is Apple only going after Samsung and not all android tablet makers?

Because the other android tablets do not violate trade dress with either their UI or their hardware design. It is the combination of everything from the grid icon layout, dotted current home screen page indicators, 4 icon dock at the bottom that is static across pages, icons that closely mimic those on the iphone, the physical design, and all the way down to the fucking packaging. Any one of these would not constitute trade dress violation. It is the whole that makes this a valid (I would say slam dunk) case.

Big deal. You all are going hoopla over the GUI design? This case also involves the design patent that apple owns rounded corners and a metal band.

Quote:

"In particular," wrote Judge Lucy Koh in her decision, "the design and appearance of Samsung's forthcoming products and packaging are directly relevant to Apple's trademark, trade dress, and design claims. Because these claims are subject to consumer confusion and 'ordinary observer' standards, the products themselves and the packaging in which they are sold are likely to be central to any motion for preliminary injunction."

I know. I looked at my 5 year old motorola ming and thought it was an iphone, with its grid of icons, metal band and rounded corners. Stupid me.

Xerox. From whose labs sprang forth WIMP, on which both Windows and MacOS are based. Indeed, Microsoft developed their UI independently, while Apple licensed the AltoUI in the following years...

You aren't suggesting that Microsoft developed Windows (released September 1995) before Apple released Mac OS (January 1994) - which was predated by the Lisa (January 1993 - project commenced 1979) - are you? The AltoUI was also tweaked with significant input from Apple during the development of the Lisa (1979 - 1983). The Lisa also introduced the "desktop" paradigm, something that the Alto didn't have, and that was designed entirely at Apple.

Android is so much more complicated, and usable than iOS, with Home Screens, Widgets with live data, Flash, a logical notifications system, true multi-tasking, fantastic Google tools, a real file structure, voice commands, voice to text and an open app system. It seems like, if anything, Samsung is right to ask to see if Apple is copying it, as is Google. The media now say's that Apple is preparing to copy Android in all of features that make Android unique and amazing.

Go Samsung!!

What are you talking about? Have you seen what Android looked like before iOS? It was a blackberry wannabe and that's probably where it would still be had Apple not come along and shown people how its done. Is Honeycomb doing some interesting things, hell yeah. I love some of the cool things they are doing but I doubt Apple is going to copy what Android is doing, because despite how cool Android is usability is not what I think of when I use it. Apple has a very specific way of designing their products that every one should know by now means, consumer first, tech geek second or third, maybe even fourth.

I the real issue here is not so much who inspires who, but the blatant copying Samsung did in-order to fool buyers or uninformed observers into thinking its an Apple product, The UI really is a blatant ripp-off, anyone saying otherwise is either not objective or blind. Everyone is familiar with what Apple's iOS UI looks like. It has a very specific familiar look to it, very specific icon placement and separation, very specific icon design. Samsung ripped all of that off, almost like a cheap chinese knock-off, except it says Samsung on it.

@Mr. Hasbean: Some of your dates seem a bit off. Try a decade earlier for Mac OS and WIndows.

Well, in and of the basis that they are both rows upon rows of squarish icons - just as the Palm was, just as the Blackberry was and is, yes. It's why I went with something different - I didn't want the same row upon row of little icons.

Honestly, if you're talking about GUI, which you are, then I'd argue LOTS of prior art going back a LONG way.

The Palm Pilot didn't even show it face until 1997. The Newton platform had come out ten years earlier. RIm was still making pagers at this time. RIM started releasing Blackberry's in 1999 (12 years later than Newton). So yeah, LOTS of prior art, going all the way back to Apple.

The Newton came out in 1993, but I think the point is valid. Apple has been working on "tablet" computers for a long time.

I wouldn't think there's be much about an iPad that could be considered trade dress, but have you seen pictures of the Galaxy Tab? It really does come off as a rip off.

In any case, trade dress lawsuits are second only to patent lawsuits in terms of wonkishness. Unless you're a Samsung or Apple shareholder or board member, what does it really matter? The lawyers have got to do something or their fine educations will go to waste.

Android is so much more complicated, and usable than iOS, with Home Screens, Widgets with live data, Flash, a logical notifications system, true multi-tasking, fantastic Google tools, a real file structure, voice commands, voice to text and an open app system. It seems like, if anything, Samsung is right to ask to see if Apple is copying it, as is Google. The media now say's that Apple is preparing to copy Android in all of features that make Android unique and amazing.

Go Samsung!!

What are you talking about? Have you seen what Android looked like before iOS? It was a blackberry wannabe and that's probably where it would still be had Apple not come along and shown people how its done. Is Honeycomb doing some interesting things, hell yeah. I love some of the cool things they are doing but I doubt Apple is going to copy what Android is doing, because despite how cool Android is usability is not what I think of when I use it. Apple has a very specific way of designing their products that every one should know by now means, consumer first, tech geek second or third, maybe even fourth.

the myth that apple fanboi's (not that you are necessarily one) can't let die...

Android is so much more complicated, and usable than iOS, with Home Screens, Widgets with live data, Flash, a logical notifications system, true multi-tasking, fantastic Google tools, a real file structure, voice commands, voice to text and an open app system. It seems like, if anything, Samsung is right to ask to see if Apple is copying it, as is Google. The media now say's that Apple is preparing to copy Android in all of features that make Android unique and amazing.

Go Samsung!!

What are you talking about? Have you seen what Android looked like before iOS? It was a blackberry wannabe and that's probably where it would still be had Apple not come along and shown people how its done. Is Honeycomb doing some interesting things, hell yeah. I love some of the cool things they are doing but I doubt Apple is going to copy what Android is doing, because despite how cool Android is usability is not what I think of when I use it. Apple has a very specific way of designing their products that every one should know by now means, consumer first, tech geek second or third, maybe even fourth.

the myth that apple fanboi's (not that you are necessarily one) can't let die...

Yeah it would be a myth if I hadn't actually used it at the time. I've been following Android development for a LONG time, even before Google snapped up the company behind it. The real myth is Google saying that Android was meant to be what it became (or more accurately what was announced) shortly after iOS came out. That's total bullshit. I still have the original prerelease sdk to prove otherwise.

Android is so much more complicated, and usable than iOS, with Home Screens, Widgets with live data, Flash, a logical notifications system, true multi-tasking, fantastic Google tools, a real file structure, voice commands, voice to text and an open app system. It seems like, if anything, Samsung is right to ask to see if Apple is copying it, as is Google. The media now say's that Apple is preparing to copy Android in all of features that make Android unique and amazing.

Go Samsung!!

"Android is so much more complicated" - you just killed your own argument...

There is no denying that for a geek Android is shinier and has more bells and whistles enabled. The problem with that scenario is that for the average user "complicated" is BAD. Complicated means they're absolutely lost when it comes to doing things with the device, which is indicative of the average number of Apps installed per iPhone user compared to the same for Android users. When it comes to UI design for the masses, less is definitely more...

If these Android devices are so much better than an iPhone as some claim, why do they have to resort to making them look like an iPhone / iPad?

I was speaking with someone over the weekend who felt that Apple's impact on the mobile market was negligible at best. Essentially, had they not created the iPhone someone else would have done it. After all, what's so remarkable about a touchscreen and row of icons on a slab? Anyone can do that. Apple just got lucky with some good marketing.

And perhaps that's the real issue. If you have no appreciation for aesthetics or usability, then Apple isn't innovatiing anything. Similarly, if you shop primarily on hardware specs or features then these competing devices aren't copying anything. In short, it could all just be a matter of perspective.